Marlowe and Shakespeare: Purveyors of Anti-Semitism. ways. The Jews in the Middle East suffered at the hands of Christians in the Crusades,

Transcription

1 Curtis Johnston Marlowe and Shakespeare: Purveyors of Anti-Semitism The anti-semitism that existed since the death of Christ manifested itself in many ways. The Jews in the Middle East suffered at the hands of Christians in the Crusades, and the Jews in Europe suffered at the hands of monarchies and ruthless men in power, who too often borrowed money and killed the creditor rather than repay the debt. Jews were expelled from entire countries, as in England in , and were prohibited from owning property or public office. Hundreds of cases of false accusations against the Jews reached Kings and Popes, resulting in negative retribution against the Jews. In 1205, Pope Innocent III issued an edict in the form of two letters that was stunning in its denigration of the Jews, and by 1215, the Fourth Lateran Council approved of trade boycott, social ostracism, [and] expulsion from all offices of authority and trust for Christians in dealing with the Jews (Hay 86). This atmosphere, one that legitimized anti- Semitism, allowed writers to include negative portrayals of Jews in their literature, ultimately finding enduring form in Marlowe s Barabas and Shakespeare s Shylock. Prior to the 1590 production of Jew of Malta, and the 1596 Shakespeare play Merchant of Venice, many different works containing Jews and elements of anti- Semitism were published. One of the most important and damaging works concerned the 1 To learn more about the ramifications of the Jewish expulsion, I turned to an excellent text, England in the Later Middle Ages, for reference. Although Maurice Hugh Keen spends 30 pages discussing Edward I s reign, in this case, only looking at , he does not mention Jewish expulsion or Jewish issues at all. This is fascinating, since Keen writes at length of Edward s problems with money and the treasury, and Jews had financially backed other monarchs in times of need. I think this omission speaks more to Keen s views than to historical accuracy. Interestingly, my analysis of the very popular David Loades Politics and Nation: England shows that despite over 30 pages of history and politics about Civil War and the Interregnum, and five pages about Cromwellian politics, no mention of Jewish readmission is made. I would have thought that somewhere in the previous four editions, somebody would have pointed out that readmission was a major occurrence prior to 1660, but evidently, if they did, Loades did not feel it necessary to include Jewish issues at all.

2 2 alleged ritual murder of Hugh of Lincoln in 1255, which was printed in Matthew Paris Historia Major shortly after Hugh s death. Paris does not tell the story as a story, but as real history, clearly positioning the Jews as guilty, and setting the stage for continued anti-semitic works, leading to Chaucer s Prioress s Tale (Felsenstein 148). Other works that discuss Jews unflatteringly previous to the writing of Jew of Malta include the Anglo-Saxon tale of Judith 2, Flores Historiarum (1228), Piers the Plowman (1362), and Confessio Amantis (1392). Felsenstein s article, Jews and Devils, describes how even though the Jews were expelled, the stereotype remained. There was no way of expelling that. On the contrary, in many ways, it was often expedient to nurture the stereotype if only as a means to imbue belief by Christians in the righteousness of their faith (17). The tension between Jewish moneylenders and Christian bankers existed throughout the entire medieval period, fueled not just by economic jealousy, but also by laws that disallowed Christians from earning interest on loans. Simon Trussler, who edited the 1987 Swan Theatre production of The Jew of Malta, describes how Christian bankers got around the laws, by trading or selling goods far under cost or setting penalties for late repayment, knowing that those penalties would be invoked purposely. Using those practices, Christian moneylenders could set their interest at 60%, while Jews set the rate of return at 43% (xviii). This backdrop of anti-semitism and Christian unrest is the scene for The Siege of Jerusalem (c ) and Chaucer s Prioress s Tale (c ). Susanne Yeager writes about the famous Siege of Jerusalem, where hundreds of thousands of Jews were slaughtered by Romans looking to assert authority over Jerusalem and the Middle East. The work itself was written anonymously, and was 2 While most Hebrew/Jewish stories are published with religious collections, the story of Judith is preserved with the monsters and pagans in the Nowell Codex (Estes 331).

3 3 published at the end of the fourteenth century. The work describes a Jerusalem with no religious relics, all stolen by the Romans. The work anachronistically describes the Romans as romantic, chivalrous, and much like the later Crusaders, liberating pagan lands (73). Lines of Siege of Jerusalem describes the cries of the knights as they killed Jews, and in lines , Christ himself fights against the heathen side, the Jewish forces (75). Elisa Narin von Court describes the poem a repellently conventional, if somewhat overwrought, model of late medieval sentiment about the Jews (227). The influence of that poem and other works kept the negativity of the Jews as the other, beasts to be despised, very much in the minds of people. Since there were no openly practicing Jews in England, the representations of them in print and the stage made the English very fearful. The other work written about the same time as Siege of Jerusalem was Chaucer s Canterbury Tales. In the Prioress s Tale, the nun tells the story of Hugh of Lincoln with great prejudice, describing the Jews as, Our firste foo, the serpent Sathanas,/ That hath in Jewes herte his wasps nest. The story finishes with a warning to the Jews that God s honor shal sprede/ The blood out-crieth on youre cursed dede. This kind of literary attack on the Jews became so common that by the 1461 publication of Sacrament Play of Croxton, the storyline of a wealthy Jew ritually reenacting the great Jewish crime of the murder of Christ with a consecrated communion wafer is believable (Campos ). A later case that fueled the anti-semitic flames in Europe, especially through the Catholic Church, was the torture an execution of Jews in 1475 in Trent, Italy. The Jews were found guilty of killing a Christian child, and sentenced for being a thief, eater and drinker of Christian blood, poisoner, blasphemer, traitor, and an enemy of Christ and

4 4 Godly majesty (Phillips 200). In 1587, William Harrison authored The Description of England, in which he described England s law allowing only ten percent on money lending. Harrison writes that usury was a trade brought in by the Jews, now perfectly practiced almost by every Christian and so commonly that he is accounted but for a fool that doth lend this money for nothing (Perret 262). This is the setting for Marlowe s Jew, Barabas, and also for a real-life ex-jew, Dr. Roderigo Lopez, and his terrible fate. Dr. Lopez was a Marrano, a Portuguese Jew who had converted to Christianity, living in England and working for the Queen, both as a physician and as a spy. In 1594, he was accused of plotting to kill Queen Elizabeth and Don Antonio, pretender to the Portuguese throne. At Lopez trial, he claimed, that he loved the Queen as well as he loved Jesus Christ (White 74). The crowd in attendance jeered the assertion, not so much because he claimed to love the woman he was accused of plotting to kill, but much more because to the English, he was a Jew whose predecessors killed Jesus. 3 This position was exactly the environment of the Jew of Malta, although Barabas is not Lopez, because of the play was acted nearly four years before Lopez was hanged. Lopez very well could be the character that inspired Shylock, although it seems more likely that both Barabas and Shylock are amalgams of the centuries-old stereotypes that dogged Jews in nearly all literature, governments, and religion. Whether or not Lopez was guilty is not important to the study of Jewish characters in literature; the issue of anti-semitism concerns the authors: were Marlowe and Shakespeare anti-semitic? If, as many critics suggest, they were just products of their time and place, then the two great playwrights 3 Another reason for the jeers is that if Lopez were guilty of conspiring to kill the Queen of England, then he was probably working with the Spanish, at the time the biggest threat to English security and propriety. Being a spy, Jewish, and of Portuguese descent made him guilty to most of the English, whether he actually conspired against the queen or not.

5 5 were anti-semitic. The negative Jewish stereotypes in the two plays bear out this assertion. The Jew of Malta was staged by Shakespeare s main rivals, the Admiral s Men, 36 times in the early 1590 s, and at least six times in alone, while Shakespeare was writing Merchant of Venice (Shapiro 275). Marlowe was not well liked, and was accused by many of being atheist 4. If that is true, then Marlowe may just hate all religions. For the purposes of this argument, whether he decried Christianity means nothing; Marlowe creates an unlikable, unredeemable Jew, further perpetuating anti- Semitism. Barabas may be created from a particular Jew, named Joseph Nasi, Duke of Naxos. He may also be derived from David Passi, a Jew politically involved with the Turks and Malta, and English diplomacy in the Mediterranean from 1585 to 1591 (Modder 19-20). In T. W. Clark s edition of The Jew of Malta, he claims that Marlowe used Kyd s Spanish Tragedy (1592) as the framework for his play (x). Barabas must also certainly be derived from the Barrabas spared by the Jews in the situation with Jesus. Barabas and Shylock both love three things: their money, daughters, and hatred for Christians. Audiences liked The Jew of Malta when it first played, and Paul White relates an occurrence that seems related to its early impact: a couple weeks after the play first hit the stage, riots and civil unrest arose over the perceived threat of foreign merchants and labourers to the livelihoods of London citizens ; Marlowe himself was implicated (77). But Marlowe may be implicated by the reader for much more than that. The characteristics he gives Barabas betray a vileness of character and hated of the Jews 4 Richard Baines, a spy, accused Marlowe of saying that Christ was a bastard and a homosexual and deserved crucifying (Bevington viii).

6 6 (perhaps even among other religions) that only furthers the anti-semitism well established in England long before The Jew of Malta. Machevill s initial description of Barabas is significant in that he claims to present the tragedy of a Jew, but adds the next line, Who smiles to see how full his bags are crammed,/ Which money was not got without my means (Prologue 30-32). This sets the tone and theme as one where the Barabas is unredeeming and although the main character, is an antagonist to all things good. The first scene shows Barabas counting his money, a pivotal description, in that the stereotypes of the Jew are immediately reinforced, and those stereotypes never lose sway under Marlowe s anti- Semitic pen. The immense wealth held by the Jew of Malta is crucial to the play, as its seizure makes the crimes of the Christians all the worse, and the wealth makes the audience resent the rich Jew all the more. Marlowe writes Barabas lines to reflect a hatred for Christianity, which is not necessarily how a real Barabas in Malta would feel prior to the seizure of his assets. Barabas says, Rather had I a Jew be hated thus/ Than pitied in a Christian poverty/ For I can see no fruits in all their faith/ But malice, falsehoods, and excessive pride (1.1, ). It is impossible for an audience to sympathize with Barabas when the early descriptions show him gloating about his fortune and attacking Christians, especially after the introduction by Machevill, where he claims that Barabas favors me. Barabas claims that blessings were promised to the Jews so early in the play (1.1, 107) only allows other characters to assert that the Jews are cursed by God for killing Jesus. The Governor feels no shame in exacting huge taxes on the Jews to pay tribute to the Turks, telling Barabas, No, Jew, like infidels./ For through our sufferance of your

7 7 hateful lives,/ Who stand accursed in the sight of heaven (1.2, 65-67). The Christian will to break Jews manifests itself in the text when the Governor gives the Jews three options when exacting tribute: pay half of their estates, become a Christian, or pay their entire estate. The Christian conversion plot element becomes much more important to the tormenting of Barabas character when Marlowe has Barabas force his daughter to pretend to convert, so she can regain his hidden money for him. Marlowe craftily shows how Barabas uses Christianity, both in that deception, and as part of his Christian-hating characteristic. In 1.2, Barabas accuses the Governor of stealing his money as part of his religion, and then claims that all Christians are wicked (115). The ironic fact that Barabas house is turned into a Christian nunnery fits smoothly with the penalty against such a hater of Christianity. Barabas is so angry as the loss of his fortune that he wishes the same penalty on the Christians that many believe was the Jewish curse: The plagues of Egypt, and the curse of heaven,/ Earth s barrenness, and all men s hatred/ Inflict upon them, thou great Primus Motor (1.2, ). Marlowe posits the setting as unbelievable; there is no logical way that Abigail could find the bags of gold and throw such heavy items out a window to Barabas without detection. And Barabas could not carry so much treasure without detection, and certainly could not use it to buy a new house so quickly or regain so much of his status as a merchant without the Governor exacting more tax. While plays are not governed by logic, Marlowe knows no bounds in creating a Jew obsessed by wealth. Requiring his daughter to pretend to be a nun (and later pretending to be a convert himself) ironically foreshadows Abigail s genuine conversion later in the play, and the audience must have delighted to see Barabas discomfort at being ironically penalized.

8 8 Barabas bombastically attacks Christians throughout the play, uncharacteristically (for real Jews) calling Christians swine-eaters in 2.3. The labeling of Jews in Act 2 is particularly significant to the anti-semitic theme of the work, because some experts have argued that the descriptions are obviously farcical and designed for humor. However, the descriptions of Barabas are far too cruel to merely establish farce or elicit laughs. When Barabas prepares to buy a slave, he speaks to the audience about his plans to exact revenge on the Christians. He says, We Jews can fawn like spaniels when we please;/ And when we grin we bite, yet are our looks/ As innocent and harmless as a lamb s (2.3, 20-22). Those lines do not necessarily hurt the Jewish identity, as any character seeking revenge could speak them. But the devastatingly anti-semitic dialogue between Barabas and his newly purchased servant, the Muslim Ithamore, does irreparable damage to the Jews. Barabas tells Ithamore that he kills sick people groaning under walls, poisons wells, extorts, cozens, and forces many into debtors prisons (2.3, ). These are the claims that have unfairly characterized the Jews for centuries, and could not be spoken by a Jewish character, even one boiling with revenge. Ithamore describes how he murdered Christian pilgrims in Jerusalem, and Barabas tells him, we are villains both:/ Both circumcised, we hate Christians both ( ). The Jew of Malta continues with unabated horrors perpetuated by Barabas, as he successfully regains his former power, murders several fellow characters, including the nuns and his daughter, and sets up an ending to the conflict that would give him control of Malta. The ending has an ironic twist (for those rooting for Barabas), in that, much like the stories of the Jew who is tricked by his own trickery, Barabas falls victim to the fate he had planned for Calymath, the invading Turk leader. Barabas sets up a trapdoor in his house over a cauldron of

9 9 water, where the unsuspecting visitor would be cooked and served as a meal for the Christians, while Calymath s men would be blown up by dynamite as they later dined. The Christian accusations against Jews as being poisoners are exacerbated when Barabas poisons the carpenters who build the trapdoor and when he has the nunnery poisoned, among other references to the age-old falsities. These examples only deepen the anti- Semitic feelings of the playgoers. The end of the play shows the Governor imprisoning Calymath, and giving thanks to God: let due praise be given/ Neither to fate nor fortune, but to heaven (5.5, ). Having the benefit of seeing, and maybe even performing in the earliest Jew of Malta productions, Shakespeare crafts a Jewish figure that in many respects is similar to Barabas. Regardless of any differences, Shakespeare s audience knew Barabas character well, and Shakespeare played off that anti-semitic tone, along with the anti-jewish sentiment garnered by the alleged Dr. Lopez conspiracy to poison Queen Elizabeth. In their introduction to the Folger Library edition of The Merchant of Venice, editors Louis Wright and Virginia LaMar argue that Shakespeare s creation of Shylock was skillfully done, not necessarily anti-semitic, but explained by the treatment he and his whole race have had to endure. He is the symbol of Hate, it is true, but Hate induced by injustice and humiliation (xi). This description sounds too much like the argument that Shylock s Jewish heritage plays no factor in the description and development of his character, that he could be Black, or even French, and his representation would be the same. That argument does not work here, as it is the stereotypes of the Jew that polarize the audience so clearly, the same Jew-turned-Christian and Turned-Tables plots that carry the play. Shakespeare wrote other plays that reacted to Marlowe s Jew of Malta. James Shapiro

10 10 describes how influential Marlowe was in Shakespeare s Titus Andronicus and Richard III, where Shakespeare consciously reacts to both the style and characterizations found in Marlowe s work (271). This influence is felt throughout Merchant of Venice, beginning with Shylock s very first words, which emphasize money, the same way the viewer is introduced to Barabas. Shakespeare sets the tone of the play as one of financial despair for Antonio, who needs money to lend to his friend Bassanio, who needs it to impress a beautiful and wealthy woman named Portia. When Antonio goes to the Jewish moneylender Shylock, Shakespeare describes Shylock s intense desire to revenge the many insults he has borne at the hands of Christians on this lending contract. Instead of requiring interest, Shylock feigns sympathy and contracts to take a pound of flesh from Antonio if he cannot pay the loan back in three months (1.3, ). Shylock is immediately explosive in his temperament, railing to Bassanio about why he refuses to meet with Antonio over dinner. Shylock says, Yes, to smell pork, to eat of the habitation which your prophet Nazarite conjured the devil into! I will buy with you, sell with you, talk with you, walk with you, and so following; but I will not eat with you, drink with you, nor pray with you (1.3, 30-34). For an audience that has many anti-semitic literary examples already, this dialogue emboldens all preexisting stereotypes. To deny supping with a Christian is to deny the entire audience accessibility. If Shylock denied the meeting because Antonio had often spat on him and kicked him, the argument could be easily made that any character that had suffered that kind of abuse should react the way Shylock does, when given the advantage over Antonio, but not because of dietary and religious customs.

11 11 Shakespeare goes to lengths to further portray a Jewish Shylock negatively, as in Act 2, where both Shylock s servant Lancelot and Shylock s daughter Jessica desire escape from the household because of Shylock s Jewish heritage. Lancelot calls Shylock a kind of devil the very devil incarnation (2.2, 21-24) because Shylock is a Jew, but offers little specific negatives outside of that. Jessica s complaint is that she is Jewish, and bearing no other complaints against her father, articulates her true purpose in leaving home: O Lorenzo,/ If thou keep promise, I shall end this strife,/ Become a Christian and thy loving wife (2.3, 19-21). When Jessica leaves with Lorenzo, she takes a casket of jewels and gold from her father for a dowry of sorts. The act of securing money to buy acceptance of a Christian serves only to make her look more Jewish or non-christian; it is Lorenzo who should be providing for the couple. When Solanio tells the story of how upset Shylock is after Jessica leaves, Shakespeare has him repeat Shylock s lines, My daughter! O my ducats! O my daughter!/ Fled with a Christian! O my Christian ducats! (2.8, 15-16). The entire quote contains more commentary about money that it does about losing his daughter. The reference to Christians and losing money to them makes Shylock appear absolutely insensitive. Shylock s sensitivity is questioned again when he delivers the famous hath not a Jew hands speech, in reply to Salerio and Solanio, as they ask Shylock about exacting a pound of flesh from Antonio. First, he explains how terribly Antonio treated him previously, and then he turns it into a Jewish issue, once again obviating the argument of simple revenge or an eye for an eye. Shylock says, I am a Jew. Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions? fed with the same food, hurt

12 12 with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer as a Christian is? If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die? And if you wrong us, shall we not revenge? If we are like you in the rest, we will resemble you in that (3.1, 52-60). This is a critical and emotional point in the play where Shakespeare could turn the audience into support for Shylock, but instead, he forces Shylock to follow through with his intent to exact that pound of flesh. An Elizabethan audience was not aware of any Christians taking a pound of flesh, and the act would seem very barbaric and along the lines of the blood libels of which they would have been aware. No audience could find support or love for Shylock when he faces the shackled and jailed Antonio and demands the pound of flesh. Forcing Shylock s daughter to pay her own dowry while accepting Christianity and then showing such cannibalistic images of Shylock only positions Shakespeare as an intentional anti-semite; the story could easily show a kind Shylock quite carefully putting Antonio to the test of mettle, (exacting an emotional pound of flesh and satisfaction) but releasing him from prison and extending the due date on the loan, earning the admiration of the audience. Christian and anti-semitic retribution could be served in The Merchant of Venice simply by having Shylock lose his case in court and have to return home a bitter man, but with the rest of his fortune and religion intact. Instead, Shakespeare chooses to extend the punishment by having Shylock signed a forced will leaving his entire estate to his daughter s Christian husband, while Shylock is also forced to convert to Christianity. During the trial, while Antonio s very life is in the balance, Shylock muses, These be the

13 13 Christian husbands! I have a daughter-/ Would any of the stock of Barabbas/ Had been her husband rather than a Christian! (4.1, ). Shakespeare would rather his daughter married a condemned thief than a Christian, while the timing of the musing lends itself to the idea that the worst penalty to assign Shylock is Christianity for himself. Perhaps the harshest aspect of the punishment is that Antonio metes it, in a gracious display that enables Shylock to continue life with money, but no identity ( ). The numerous references to the Jew being a dog, and to the grossness of Shylock s behavior fit the unrelenting anti-semitic text that makes up The Merchant of Venice; to argue otherwise is irresponsible. The impact of The Jew of Malta and The Merchant of Venice was felt very strongly on the stage. A short list of plays featuring Jewish characters includes: Machiavellus (1597); David and Bathsabe (1599); Joseph, the Jew of Venice (c. 1600); Travailes of the Brothers Shirley (1607); A Christian Turned Turk (1610); The Tragedy of Mariam (and Herod) (1613); The Custom of the Country (1622); The Raging Turk (1627); and The Jewes Tragedy (1638). The long-term effects of performing an anti-semitic play are felt in the current awareness of all thing anti-semitic; Marion Perret writes, Directors have to deal with our assumption or fear that the play is anti-semitic; accusations dog the play because our consciousness, scarred by modern persecution of the Jews, encourages a stubborn tendency to see this Jew as symbolic of all Jews (264). Despite her use of dog in her description of the issue of producing this work, Perret s point is somewhat valid. Perret should argue that readers and viewers should be exposed to the hypocrisy and anti-

14 14 Semitism of both works today to properly describe the Elizabethan attitudes towards Jews. These plays are fine teaching tools that define and put Marlowe and Shakespeare in perspective, and if they serve to change or at least soften contemporary attitudes toward Jews, then Marlowe and Shakespeare s legacy can also be slightly redefined.

15 15 Works Cited Bevington, David, and Eric Rasmussen, eds. Christopher Marlowe: Tamburlaine, Parts I and II, Doctor Faustus, A- and B- Texts, The Jew of Malta, Edward II. Oxford: Clarendon Press, Campos, Edmund Valentine. Jews, Spaniards, and Portingales: Ambiguous Identities of Portuguese Marranos in Elizabethan England. English Literary History 69 (2002): Estes, Heide. Feasting with Holfernes: Digesting Judith in Anglo-Saxon England. Exemplaria 15.2 (Fall 2003): Felsenstein, Frank. Anti-Semitic Stereotypes: A Paradigm of Otherness in English Popular Culture, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, Jews and Devils: Anti-Semitic Stereotypes of Late Medieval and Renaissance England. Literature and Theology: An International Journal of Theory, Criticism and Culture. 4.1 (March 1990): Hay, Malcom. Europe and the Jews: The Pressure of Christendom over 1900 Years. Chicago: Academy Chicago Publishers, Marlowe, Christopher. The Jew of Malta. T. W. Clark, ed. New York: Hill and Wang, Narin van Court, Elisa. The Siege of Jerusalem and Augustinian Historians: Writing about Jews in Fourteenth-Century England. The Chaucer Review 29.3 (1995): Perrett, Marion. Shakespeare s Jew: Preconception and Performance. Shakespeare Studies 20 (1988):

16 16 Phillips, Jerry. Cannabilism qua Capitalism. Cannibalism and the Colonial World. Eds. Francis Barker, Peter Hulme, and Margaret Iverson. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, Shakespeare, William. The Merchant of Venice. Eds. Louis Wright and Virginia LaMar. New York: Pocket Books, Shapiro, James. Which is The Merchant Here, and Which The Jew?: Shakespeare and the Economics of Influence. Shakespeare Studies 20 (1988): Trussler, Simon, ed. The Jew of Malta. Stratford: Yeager, Suzanne. The Siege of Jerusalem and Biblical Exegesis: Writing About Romans in Fourteenth-Century England. The Chaucer Review (2004): White, Paul Whitfield. Marlowe and the Politics of Religion. The Cambridge Companion to Christopher Marlowe. Ed. Patrick Cheney. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2004.